I am 75 yrs of age, and have a collection of old 35mm film camera lenses. I shoot almost entirely landscapes, hand held (usually with monopod) and f11-f13. I decided to take quick snapshots from my deck looking out at the bay using the NEX 7, hand held, f11 and make quick and dirty comparisons looking at the "actual pixels" view in CS5. I checked these lenses:
1. Topcon 135mm f2.8 RE Topcor
2. Topcon 28mm f2.8 RE Topcor
3. Topcon 100mm f2.8 RE Topcor
4. 35mm Leica f2.8 Elmarit R
5. 50mm f2 Leica Summicron R
6. Contax Zeiss 28mm f2.8 Distagon (C/Y mount)
7. Minolta 45mm f2 MD Rokkor-X "(Pancake")
8. 50mm f1.4 Asahi Super-Takumar
9. 28mm f3.5 Nikkor-H
Just a quick observation in these limited snapshots:
1. lens that seemed to have the best contrast and sharpness is the Zeiss 28mm.
2. Close second (believe it or not) is the Topcon 135mm RE Topcor. I was extremly pleased with contrast and resolution
3. 100mm Topcor-- very nice, but a tad less than the 135mm Topcor.
4. The Leica 35mm Elmarit needs another look. I made three shots--one looks very, very good, but the other two are soft (probably mis-focus)
5. The Leica 50mm-2 of 4 are soft--again probably mis-focus
6. The 50mm f1.4 Super Takumar appears to be OK but not sensational.
7. Ditto 28mm Nikkor.
8. Biggest surprise was the 45mm f2 Minolta. It was excellent...on a close par to the 28mm Zeiss.
VERY un scientific "real world" tests, that may prove interesting to fellow NEX 7 shooters
Best regards to all
Dave in NJ
cool, good to know. did you look at corners at all or mostly in the central part? i'm asking because my minolta 45/2 is very good in the center but very poor in the corners even stopped well down.
briantho wrote:
At f11 you're over the diffraction limit. Try f5.6 instead.
I agree that the sweet spot of most lenses is usually several stops down (about f5.6 as you suggest), but as I stated I shoot landscapes at f 11 or 13 for adequate depth of field, so that is where I checked the lenses.
gurtch wrote:
I agree that the sweet spot of most lenses is usually several stops down (about f5.6 as you suggest), but as I stated I shoot landscapes at f 11 or 13 for adequate depth of field, so that is where I checked the lenses.
You could be degrading the lens performance by stopping down to f/11 and smaller. Use a wider angle lens for more DOF.
JimBuchanan wrote:
You could be degrading the lens performance by stopping down to f/11 and smaller. Use a wider angle lens for more DOF.
Or "focus peaking" which I have been wanting to try.
Dave
gurtch wrote:
The only one I know of is from Rainbow Imaging. Quite inexpensive, and well made. Mine works fine.
Dave
I purchased a Rainbow mount to put my Exakta lens on my M4/3s bodies. The mount fits loose on the body, requiring some shims. Sound like the Nex one mounts better.
Harry Palmer
Kingfishphoto wrote:
I purchased a Rainbow mount to put my Exakta lens on my M4/3s bodies. The mount fits loose on the body, requiring some shims. Sound like the Nex one mounts better.
Harry Palmer
Yes Harry, mine fits tight with no wabble. Seeing how inexpensive they are, it does not surprise me that there is some sample variations with tolerences.
Dave
